THE BOOK NO ONE CAN READ

BY DAVE REESE
Copyright 1978 Revised 2002

KJB STUDIES PMB 232 2123 OLD SPARTANBURG RD GREER SC 29650

Email: drgo5849@aol.com

CONTENTS
Introduction Which Bible is the Word of God?. Different Sowers-Seeds-Results Who Stole My Bible?. The Book No One Can Read. Only Originals Inspired? The Mixed Multitude. Typical Fundamentalist. A More Literal Translation Is The Living Bible Really Alive?.. New American Standard Version.. New International Version. New Scofield Reference Bible. The Open Bible New King James Bible Good News For Modern Man Bible Criticism and Translation 3 3 4 8 12 15 18 21 24 26 30 32 35 38 43 45 46

INTRODUCTION The original articles in this book were written in the 1970s. Translations that were currently in print at that time were critiqued. The reader should be aware that modern translations are constantly revised and republished. This is due to 2 major things: 1. In order to sell modern translations of the Bible, publishers must appear to be printing something unique, or making the translation better than the last. 2. Some editors and publishers when caught in an unpopular error, correct it in the next edition. A few readings such as the profanity in the Living Bible changed from one edition to the next. The major premise of Bible correctors is the same: There is no infallible Bible in existence in any language. Our observations over thirty years ago remain true today. We have no doubt hundreds of new errors are in the multiplicity of translations added since then. WHICH BIBLE IS THE WORD OF GOD? A new Christian, walking into a bookstore anywhere in the USA, looking for a Bible, will see scores of Biblesall of them different. He is as bedazzled as a newly wed sent by his wife to buy detergent at a supermarket. All claim to be the best and all claim to have what the others dont. Whatever happened to plain old soap? Unfortunately, the question is easy to answer but more difficult to prove. Bible translation work is flooded with trade language. You must go to graduate school and spend $50,000 to learn terms before you can even enter the conversation, much less evaluate translations. The bottom line is the same as the choice of detergents: get the one that works. This small book emphasizes the critical area of common sense in Bible translation. We omit the trade language and cut to the bone of the problem. Educated answers are endless. We can argue all day long about the value of certain chemicals added to detergents before or after processing. Doctors are on both sides of the fence. When all is said and done, we want the soap that gets the clothes clean.

DIFFERENT SOWERSDIFFERENT SEEDSDIFFERENT RESULTS What a man omits sometimes is more important than what he includes. When a person talks about religion, his works, and his achievements and omits the Lord Jesus Christ, it is an accurate observation to say: he is impressed with himself; does not know the Lord Jesus Christ, or for whatever reason, he refuses to give Him the proper place of preeminence. The Word of God says: And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. (Colossians 1:18). This is true regarding translations. Translations that omit or ignore the preeminence of the Lord Jesus Christ should be rejected. For hundreds of years Gods people had one Bible that exalted the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Satan hates the Lord Jesus Christ and any person or Book that gives the Lord Jesus Christ preeminence. Therefore, the adversary began a subtle plot to undermine the one Bible God wrote. Gods Bible is truth (John 17:7). Satan is a liar and the father of lying (John 8:43-44). The Devil hates Gods Bible and will do anything to destroy it. The Lord Jesus Christ warned His disciples of this work of the Devil 37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; 38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; 39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. 40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. 41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; 42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 13:37-42). The Lord Jesus Christ sowed good seed (13:37) which produced children of the kingdom (13:38), but the devil sowed bad seed which produced children of the wicked one (13:38-39). The devil sowed his seed right where Gods good seed was, in Gods own field (Matthew 13:24-25). All of this sowing by the devil took place away from mens eyes, while men slept (13:25). The devil always disguises his work so people will not recognize him and see what he is doing. While men slept, the devil sowed his wicked seed by exalting scholarship that took a new and critical approach towards manuscript evidence. This attack took place where future influential leaders are trained: in seminaries and graduate schools. It did not begin in the local church. It began at the source of training and filtered down, gradually leavening the thinking of the common man. The devil taught men that Gods word was corrupted by translating newer manuscripts (manuscripts farther removed from the first century) and that modern education, following older manuscripts, could restore it. Men believed this and became convinced that since two older and better seeds were now available, scholarship had finally moved closer to the truth of what the original scriptures said. Educated men found them, so the devil argued, and since

education proved these two seeds are the oldest, they are the best. But the oldest is not necessarily the best. We all have books in our library that survive time and wear simply because they are not worth reading or using. I wore out my first Bible (the pages fell out and gradually some were even destroyed because I took it everywhere) and bought a newer one. I bought a newer one but the same translation, the King James Bible. There is on my bookshelf a New World Translation. Look for my first Bible and you can not find it, it was literally worn out by use. To all appearances, the New World Translation (the Jehovahs Witness Bible) is the oldest on my shelf and the King James Bible is the newest. What does this prove? Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. (John 7:24). These two oldest seeds are called Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.1 At the same time, the devil convinced men that if God had lost these two great seeds for a long period of time, then He could have lost others. The purpose of this teaching is to convince men that although Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are the best so far, perhaps better seeds can be found. No one could say that he had all of Gods Words. Satan was very delighted to hear men say, All translations have errors in them. Within less than fifty years, there are over 200 English translations of the Bible, each one claiming to be an improvement upon all others. Scores of new ones appear each year and no end is in sight. Religious publishing of Bible translations is one of the largest business enterprises in the world. The devil knew his work was a success. But Gods Word says: Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. (Matthew 24:35). The Lord Jesus Christ will not allow one of His Words to pass away. Although He allows Satan to sow the wicked seed, one day the Lord Jesus Christ will throw the devil and all that listen to his lies into the lake of fire. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. (Revelation 20:10). And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:15). If you are a child of God born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. (I Peter 1:23) you know that something is wrong with a book that claims to be a Bible, but takes the preeminence from the Lord Jesus Christ.

MANUSCRIPTS. Codex Vaticanus (B) has been in the Vatican Library at Rome since 1481. It dates c. A.D. 340. Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph) was discovered in St. Catherine's Monastery by Constantin Tischendorf in 1844 and dates c. A.D. 350.

And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. (Luke 23:42). The following Bibles take the word Lord out of Luke 23:42. The Revised Standard Version, Nestles Greek Text, The New English Bible, The Berkeley Version, The New American Standard Version, The Good News For Modern Man, Phillips New Testament, The Diaglott, The New World Translation, The New International Version. (There are many more). These Bibles take the word Lord right out of the dying thiefs mouth. Why would anybody want to stop a dying man from accepting Jesus as his Lord? Only one person could be behind thisthe devil! These same Bibles take the words on me out of the following verse: Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. (John 6:47KJV). Even devils believe, but they do not believe on Jesus. The devil wants to stop others from believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. The preeminence of the Lord Jesus Christ is attacked by these Bibles in other verses. The worship given to Jesus is omitted in Matthew 20:20 and is changed to merely kneeling or bowing down. Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him. (Matthew 20:20). Then the mother of Zebedee's sons came to Him with her sons, kneeling down and asking something from Him. (Matthew 20:20NJB). Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to Him with her sons, bowing down, and making a request of Him. (Matthew 20:20NAS). The name of Jesus is left out in Matthew 8:29, Matthew 13:51, Matthew 16:20, Acts 8:37, Romans 16:24, I Corinthians 16:22, II Corinthians 4:6, Galatians 6:15, Ephesians 3:9, Ephesians 3:14, Colossians 1:2, I Thessalonians 1:1, II Timothy 4:22, and I Peter 5:10. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? (Matthew 8:29). What do you want with us, Son of God?" they shouted. Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?" (Matthew 8:29NIV). If the Bible you have omits the words Lord in Luke 23:42, on me in John 6:47, worshipping in Matthew 20:20 or omits the name of Jesus in even one verse, you do not have the complete word of God. You have a Bible printed by men who believe the father of lies, the god of this world, the devil. And these verses are only a sampling of hundreds of changes and omissions.

The only Bible in the English language that has the correct words is the King James Version. Do not confuse THE KING JAMES VERSION with the King James II, the New King James Bible, the New Scofield Reference Bible or The Open Bible. The devil is now putting covers on his lies that use the name of King James. A wolf wears sheeps clothing for the same purpose, to deceive.

WHO STOLE MY BIBLE? 11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord: 12 And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it. (Amos 8:11-12). Not long ago, a very surprising thing happened to me. I left my Bible in a church. On the way home I missed my Bible and remembered where I left it. Since we were a long distance from the church, I called and asked the people to get it and hold it for me until the next morning. After a thorough search, they informed me that it was no longer there. Someone had taken the Bible! I hoped for several days that whoever took it would return it. They could not mistake it for their Bible. My Bible was a wide margin Oxford, with many years of Bible study notes and outlines in the margins. Subsequent inquiry and search did not recover the Book. Someone stole my Bible. I mention the incident, because it illustrates the truth of our text. We are losing our Bible in the very place we should not. Amos prophesied a future day when a famine will strike the land. It is a famine of the Word of God. Men shall wander everywhere seeking the Book and shall not find it. The same principle is given in II Thessalonians 2: 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thessalonians 2:11:12). The context of 2 Thessalonians 2 deals with a future day during which will come after a falling away (Verse 3). Then there will be a revelation of the man of sin (Verse 3), who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped. (Verse. 3). 1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thessalonians 2:1-12). The people to whom God will send a strong delusion (Verse 11) are people who had THE TRUTH, but would not believe it (Verse 12). We believe this passage deals with the future tribulation period. It does not describe church age events. However, the background for this future strong delusion and working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders is being readied during this present age. Earlier in the chapter, Paul stated, For the mystery of iniquity doth already work. (Verse 7). THE FUTURE FAMINE OF GODS WORD God will allow Satan to publish and promote his Satanic Version in the future tribulation period. Just as God allowed Satan to give a lie to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:4, he will be permitted to spread his poison again. The lie of Genesis 3:4 was the truth of Genesis 2:17b, but one word was addednot. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: (Genesis 3:4). Satans temptation in Matthew 4 supposedly had Scriptural authorityScripture that Satan pulled from the context of Psalm 91. And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. (Matthew 4:6). Satan conveniently omitted the following verse from Psalm 91. Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet. (Psalm 91:13). The wonder of this age is how preachers and teachers are so blinded to this Bible mutilation. Even though they know the devil attacked the word of God in the Garden of Eden, and was so bold as to use it to tempt God Himself, they do not believe he can enter their hermeneutics or Greek exegesis class.

THE SET UP Satan is lining up translations and versions for his final assault on Gods Holy Word. His propaganda has so thoroughly permeated fundamental schools, that Bible teachers are afraid to state that they have the WORD OF GOD WITHOUT ERROR IN THEIR HAND. Those who take a strong stand on the issue are dismissed or asked to quietly leave if they can not stop referring to the infallible Book. Leaders in the ranks of fundamentalism have resorted to a neo-orthodox language with regard to the Bible. These men of God wave a King James Bible before the church or school and say, The Word of our God shall stand forever (Isaiah 40:8). The reason they do this is that the average Christian in the pew or classroom believes that the Book he believed when he got saved was infallible with no mistakes or errors. He was born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of god, which liveth and abideth forever. (1 Peter 1:23). However, if perchance there is a scholar in the audience, the scholar very comfortably sits back and relaxes, knowing that he and the man in the pulpit have a trade language of their own. When they say Bible, they do not mean any book in existence today. When they refer to all Scripture being inspired, they mean only the original writing, nothing else. When they say, The Bible is without error, they mean the various Greek and Hebrew manuscripts selected by them. If asked what or which one this Greek or Hebrew Bible is, they immediately begin to elaborate on how many souls they won last year, how many years they studied Greek and Hebrew, when they studied, who their teacher was, etc., etc. These men are inconsistent who wave a King James Bible proclaiming, I believe the Bible, when they actually believe there are more accurate and reliable Bibles than the KJV. This was vividly illustrated in two recent publications. One article, while claiming to believe the King James Bible should be used in preaching, declared the American Standard Version to be the most accurate translation. It doesnt take a Philadelphia lawyer to wonder why you should use a lessor version in your preaching. The other article declared that The Bible and Christ were Divine Twins, infallible and inspired, while quoting from the King James Bible and the American Standard Version. On the same page with this article was an ad advertising the New International Version as the most accurate and reliable of all English translations. It seems more than one set of twins got into the family It is very clear to any thinking person that these men are confused as to where the Word of God is. They proclaimed the ASV (1901) as the most reliable and accurate until the NASV (1963) came out. They then took up the NASV banner and proudly said, This book is an accurate and faithful reproduction of the Greek Text. That is, until, the NIV came out. Now they are saying the same thing about the NIV. They did not really believe any of them were faithful, accurate and reliable. If they had really believed their statements, they would have stayed with the ASV (1901) instead of abandoning the ship for the more accurate NASV (1963). They are now scurrying like rats to climb aboard the newest model, The New International Version, 1978. A one-quarter page ad in a leading fundamental paper declares the NIV as the perfect modern English translation It is called the gift of a lifetime. With such accolades as this you would expect these men to take this perfect modern English translation forsaking all others till death do them part. Not on your life! As soon as the next Bible comes off the Madison Avenue presses, these preachers will divorce the NIV and remarry just as sure as shootin.

10

YOU ARE LOSING YOUR BIBLE IN CHURCH Every time you sit in a church service where the King James Bible is criticized, you subject yourself to a system dedicated to destroying the only Authority we have. The greatest enemy of Christianity is not outside the church. The greatest enemy is the ignorance and blas attitude of born-again believers toward the bible business. We are actually losing our Bible in church. The men who claim to be men of God are the ones who are taking it away. The battle for the Bible is not in the modernistic schools and churches; the war over the Word is in the fundamental circles. Be sure you still have your Bible after you leave church this week. Some preacher may try to take it away.

11

THE BOOK NO ONE CAN READ 11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed: 12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned. (Isaiah 29:11-12). The average Bible school is locked into an unchangeable pattern: the critical education of pastors, missionaries, and teachers who not believe there is an absolute authority anywhere within their reach. The god of this world has pulled his greatest deception over the eyes of many Christians. The greatest deception is not to turn men from being soul-winners. The greatest deception is not to stop preaching. The greatest deception is not the demise of the local church. The greatest deception is not a lack of standards. THE GREATEST DECEPTION SATAN HAS EVER PULLED OFF IS TO CONVINCE THE CHRISTIAN THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE THE ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY IN HIS HAND. Once this bamboozlement is accomplished, Satan wins the victory in preaching, church control, separation, and all other issues. How has this happened in Bible schools, colleges, and seminaries? The deceit has not been sudden. There has been a leavening process, which gradually oozed across this nation. Beginning in the 1800s, the leaven was inserted into the classroom and spread to the pulpit. THE NEUTRAL VIEW OF THE BIBLE Immediately after the Protestant Reformation, modern philosophy (love of wisdom) made its entrance. Philosophers prided themselves in the assumption of the neutral role, a role that looked at both sides and extolled the virtues of each position. This impartial and unprejudiced viewpoint became the starting point in determining all things. 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, ever his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse. (Romans 1:18-20). God does not accept a neutral position. It is either cold or hot, for Him or against Him, Heaven or Hell. One who looks at the creation and says, It evolved through natural processes over many years is a liar. He does not believe it for a moment. He knows better. The Bible says, The invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen. The fool has said in his heart (not his head), There is no God. (Psalms 53:1). God says there are men who hold the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18), and that all who do so are without excuse. (Romans 1:20). Bible correctors tell us that when God finished the originals, He went away from the Bible and left it to natural processes. Mans errors and discrepancies crept into the text. The result of this natural process is the common belief that

12

every Bible in existence today has error. This is what you hear in almost every Bible class in Christian schools. But there is more proof of the divine origin and superintendence of Scripture than there is of the physical creation of the universe. All of these professors know the Bible very clearly states that God wrote only one Bible. They also know that God promised to preserve that one Bible down to the smallest letter (Matthew 5:18). Professing themselves to be wise (Romans 1:22), they show what fools they really are to attack and mutilate Gods Holy Word. Why do not men begin from the positive standpoint that God has a perfect Book in existence today? Why begin at the negative? The Bible states many times over that a perfect revelation of God exists and that it will never pass away. The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand forever. (Isaiah 40:8). The Bible believer must believe that the Word of our God stands forever. If the Word of our God is standing today, where is it? Where was it in Pauls day? Paul, by inspiration, tells us: 15 And that from a child thou has known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness(Timothy 3:15-16). The Holy Scripture was in Timothys and Pauls possession. Could they have been holy and been like any other writings? Could they have been holy and contained errors, mistakes and glosses? Holy means separate, apart from othersa characteristic of God Himself. Are the writings of Shakespeare holy? The inspired Scriptures were in Pauls and Timothys hands. Timothy did not have the originals. They had copies. The person who says that only the originals were inspired and all translations have errors, is wrong. He should know what 2 Timothy 3:15-16 says and accept it. He is in the same boat as the evolutionist. The evolutionist knows there is a God Who created everything, but he wants to protect his education and scholarship, so he invents and exalts evolution. He can be like God, knowing good and evil (Genesis 3:5) in his man-exalting educational position. The Bible corrector knows what the Bible says about Itself. But how could he exalt himself by just studying and believing what the Book says? In order to exalt himself, he gets a Ph.D., M.Div., Th.D., or Litt.D., and proudly sticks it behind his name to lend authority to his pronouncements. Then he takes his Greek manual and proceeds to correct every translation in existence. He becomes as God! He now believes men should look at him and others like him as the authority. If any question his authority to handle Gods Word in such fashion, he puffs himself up and says, Well, if you knew Greek and Hebrew like I do, you could see the mistakes, too. In order to deflate this egotist, one needs only to ask if the Greek text he has in his hand is Gods Word without error. Without exception, you will find that these do not believe there is a copy of Gods Word in Hebrew, Greek, Sanscrit, Egyptian hieroglyphics, Old English, classical Greek, koine Greek or any other language on the face of the earth! According to these modern day Jehoiakims (Jeremiah 36), we should wait for their scholarly pronouncements and mutilations before accepting any word in the King James Bible as being authoritative.

13

THE INFALLIBLE BIBLE Do you have an infallible Bible? I do. Mine is a King James Bible, 1611 edition. We have heard all about the KJB being revised six times, the Apocrypha being in the original edition, the archaic words, the Episcopalian translators, the supplement to the Book of The Revelation, plus several others. We are still convinced that the King James as we have it is Gods Word for the English speaking people everywhere. It is both amusing and tragic to apply Isaiah 29:11-12 to this generation. Hand a King James Bible to a Ph.D., and ask him to read it. He says, I cannot; for it is sealed. He mumbles about the archaic words and incorrect verb tenses. He complains about the transliteration of certain words like baptism. He cannot read it unless he corrects, amends, and updates it after the manner of his alma mater. Hand a King James Bible to a Bible school freshman that has been infected with the disease of man pleasing, and he says, I am not learned. I havent studied Greek or Hebrew. The following verse in Isaiah 29:13 describes this generation: Wherefor the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men. (Isaiah 29:13).

14

ONLY ORIGINALS INSPIRED? An elaborate, ornate system has been constructed by the scholars to teach that the only writings of the Bible ever inspired were the original manuscripts. The doctrine was fabricated so that the scholars could freely correct the Bible by their education. This maneuver put the scholar into the position of absolute authority and relegated the Holy Spirit to a secondary position. This man-made doctrine of original inspiration can be found in books such as the following: no one believes that the translations and revision are inspired. The doctrine of verbal inspiration is simply this: The original writings, ipsissima verba, came through the penmen direct from God page 45. There is no translation absolutely without error, nor could there be page 12. THE FUNDAMENTALS, Editors: R. A. Torrey, A. C. Dixon, and others. Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1917. We do not claim for any copy or any translation the absolute, divine perfection that was in the original autographs. Inspiration refers to the original manuscripts. Page 69. OUR GOD-BREATHED BOOKTHE BIBLE, John R. Rice, Sword of the Lord Publishers, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1969. Where did these fundamental scholars get these ideas? Certainly not from Scripture! These men did not and cannot produce one Scripture reference that states only the original manuscripts were inspired. These fundamentalists evidently are following the traditions of the scholars who taught them, instead of God Who called them. The question of inspiration is concerned solely with the original texts. Page 148. BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS, Milton S. Terry. Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan. the original documents, and they alone, were verbally inspired. Page 80. INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT. Henry Clarence Thiessen, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1943. We are certain that some Bible critic reading this book has already blown his stack over the remarks. My friend, answer this question: Where, in what book, chapter and verse does the Bible say that only the original writings were inspired? If you cannot produce Scripture for your doctrine, why not listen to what God says is proper doctrine? Will you correct your doctrine if the Bible says that copies and translations of Scripture were and are inspired? If God said copies were inspired, would you believe God, even if it makes your $50,000 diploma look like a dung heap? If only the original writings were inspired, there is no Bible in existence in any language that is Gods perfect word. If it is true that the oldest originals of the Old Testament were given in 2500 BC, that means that almost 4,500 years stand between us and the oldest original portions of the Old Testament. If God left the transmission of His Word to the ability of men for 4,500 years, there is no question that errors, omissions and glosses crept into all the copies. A 4,500 year period would produce such problems that the multiplicity of texts or dedicated scholarship could never recover the true original reading or anything close to it. One cannot argue for a nominal protection of the inspired Word by the Holy Spirit. God does not conduct His work in a partial, hit-and-miss fashion. The Holy Spirit either preserved the inspired Word, in a thorough, accurate manner, or He did not preserve it at all.

15

A friend of mine wrote a leading preacher about an article, which stated that only the originals were inspired. The preacher answered the questions by pointing out to my friend that he had misspelled the preachers name and omitted the ZIP code. The preacher said that this was an example of Bible transmission and translation. According to him, it was impossible to avoid minor errors, and impossible to commit major errors. Now, as soon as the preacher opened his mouth, he showed his exact feelings toward the protection and transmission of Gods Word. He has no more regard for the preservation of Gods word through the ages, than he has toward a man writing a letter. If God has no more regard for His word than he does for the writing of letters, there was no purpose in inspiration to begin with. If all copies of Gods Word have errors, we do not have an infallible Bible. Furthermore, if there are errors in all translations, we do not know whether the errors are major or minor. In Gods eyes, all errors are major. Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. (Deuteronomy 4:2). When all of the scholarly hot air stops blowing, the Word of God still clearly states that A COPY OF GODS WORD IS INSPIRED. And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Timothy 3:15-17). The facts are: (1.) (2.) (3.) (4.) The Scriptures Timothy had were inspired. Timothy did not have the originals. These Scriptures in Timothys hand were called holy. Paul is not dealing with original inspiration in the passage.

According to I Peter 1:23-25, Peter had the incorruptible word of God. 23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away. 25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you. (1 Peter 1:23-25). Are you going to say that only the originals were incorruptible? If they were, does not that mean that they are still around today? If the skin, parchment, or paper decayeddid the WORDS? Every time you accuse the Word of God of error or state that no Bible in existence is

16

perfect, you charge Gods word with corruption! If Gods word is incorruptible, some Bible must be Gods perfect word today. Which one is it? If the incorruptible Word of God which Peter had in the first century has corruption by the twentieth century, then you can expect the incorruptible body you receive at the resurrection to gradually decay at the same rate. You may also expect the incorruptible God (Romans 1:23) to corrupt. God has magnified His Word above His Name (Psalms 138:2) and be assured that whatever happens to His Word will surely happen to Him. I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name. (Psalm 138:2). In the light of these words, are you still going to teach that only the originals were inspired? What saith the Scripture?

17

THE MIXED MULTITUDE And the children of Israel journeyed from Ramses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. And a mixed multitude went up also with them. (Exodus 12:37-38). The nation of Israel was brought up out of Egypt by the mighty hand of God. However, a mixed multitude mingled themselves with the nation and caused some real problems for Israel later on. And the mixed multitude that was among them fell a lusting; and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat? (Numbers 11:4). It is not always easy to spot the mixed multitude. They travel with Gods people and have many deceiving characteristics that camouflage their true nature. We have a mixed multitude of bibles with us today. This mixed multitude look like Gods Word, in some places sound like Gods Word, and many have been duped into believing that they are authentic. One fact the Christian should know about so-called scholarship which corrects the Bible, is this: Every scholar who believes the King James Bible has errors in it, does not believe there is an infallible Bible in existence. We realize that there is a brand of Christian today who laughs at the man who believes there are no are no errors in the King James Bible. The King James Bible believer has the last laugh though, because the RSV, NASV, ASV, NWT, LL, GNMM, TCT, PT, NEB, RV, NESTLES, ALFORDS, or any of the other members of the mixed multitude, does not believe he has the infallible word of God in his hand. The next time a doctor laughs at you for believing the KJB is Gods Word without errorask him to show you the infallible Bible he believes. He cant. He does not have one. The only thing he has is the circle of commentators who follow each other in their ideas, like a coon dog chasing his tail. This scholar can show you Greek texts, Hebrew texts, Doctor So-and-So, but he can not show you one Bible without an error in it. What about the truth? All of this dust the Bible correctors raise about side issues has nothing to do with the fact at hand. Do we have Gods Word? If we do, where can a poor sinner get a copy of it? The liberal preacher tells the seeking sinner that there is no such bookall of them have errors. For his honesty in stating what he believes, we admire him; for his infidelity, we are sick. The fundamental Bible scholar tells the sinner that there was such a Book and that he believed it was the Bible, leading the poor sinner to believe he is speaking of the Book in his hand. But, if that sinner got saved, went to school and sat in that scholars Bible class, he would hear something different. The KJB has archaic words; Only the originals were inspired; Acts 8:37 should not be in the Bible; Book of life should read tree of life in Revelation 22:19; The last half of Romans 8:1 has been added; A sinner should be the sinner in Luke 18:13; John 5:3-4 should be omitted; I John 5:7-8 should be omitted; etc., etc., etc. In this case, when it comes to telling the truththe liberal beats the fundamentalist! If you do not believe the Bible (definite article), why do you not quit lying about it? We will respect you more for honesty about your infidelity.

18

Why do you not state what you really believe? Why not say, I believe the various biblical manuscripts which differ one from another at various places, must be evaluated by scholars who themselves determine what the standards of evaluation are, and after a process of time, increased learning, and perhaps the discovery of older manuscripts, we will be able to come close to the original Word of God, while always keeping the avenues of innovative translation open to meet modern mans desires. Those who believe the KJV is Gods Word are discounted as being half-wits, or, at the least unscholarly. However, men who believe the Book who have just as many degrees as those who criticize it do. On the question of education alone, it is a toss-up. I would much rather go to the judgment seat of Christ guilty of believing the BIBLE TOO MUCH THAN believing it TOO LITTLE. EXAMPLE OF JESUS The Lord Jesus Christ had copies of copies of the original manuscripts when He preached. Have you ever read where He said anything about the originals? Did He ever say, omit this, add this, or change that? The Lord believed He had Gods Word IN HIS HAND, or He was guilty of accommodating Himself to the popular view of His day, or He was deliberately lying. What think ye of Christ? Was Paul guilty of Bibliolatry when he told Timothy that the COPIES of the originals were INSPIRED? (2 Timothy 3:15-17). Was God able to preserve only the Old Testament? If the Lord Jesus Christ stated that every jot and tittle of Gods Word were preserved in His earthly ministry, we are assured that He has not changed His mind. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:18). Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever. (Hebrews 13:8). Most Bible scholars who talk about following Jesus dont follow Him in His attitude, speech, and preaching of Gods Word. 1. The Lord Jesus was not a Bible critic. He came not to destroy, but to fulfill. (Matthew 5:17). 2. The Lord Jesus believed every letter and marking of the copies in existence in His day was Gods Word. (Matthew 5:18). 3. The Lord Jesus warned that Satan would sow corrupt scripture to produce religious fakers. (Matthew 13:24-25). BASIS OF FALSE BIBLES The basis of all so-called bibles, the mixed multitude, is the idea that a great portion of Gods Word was not available until two manuscripts were found in the 1800s. It is on this idea that all modern biblical criticism is based. This is the reason for the mixed multitude. If this hypothesis is so (oldest manuscripts are the best), then this means that God lost His Word for several hundred years. It also means that He could have misplaced other portions of it that some scholar will ultimately discover. Until then, we do not know what God actually said. If their

19

ideas are true, lets eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die and no one knows if we really have the word of God or not. As for me and my house, we shall serve the Lord. We shall memorize the King James Bible, preach it, live by it, and die by it. Choose you this day whom you will serve. THE MIXED MULTITUDE HIGHER CRITICISMS PERVERSIONS VERSUS GODS WORD Revised Version American Standard Version Revised Standard Version Living Bible Amplified Bible New English Bible New American Standard Version New Scofield Reference Bible New International Version Montgomerys Godbeys Alfords Nestles Moffatts New World Translation Berkeley Good News For Modern Man Diaglot Phillips Darbys Douay Version Confraternity Cottonpatch Version Etc., Etc.

King James Bible of 1611. With over 360 years of God-blessed fruitfulness, It remains the authoritative and standard English translation.

20

THE FUNDAMENTAL POSITION ON BIBLES There are many of those who call themselves fundamentalists as opposed to neoevangelicals, liberals, or modernists. This breed of fundamentalist distinguishes himself from the liberals and modernists by claiming to believe the Bible and earnestly contend for the faith. However, his whole contention for the faith revolves around the protection of something he claims he has never seen. He is obsessed with protecting the doctrine of inspiration of the original Bible manuscripts. He calls it heresy when anyone teaches that a copy of the originals could be inspired. Briefly stated, the general doctrine of inspiration is this: God superintended the writing of the Bible so that every word is accurately recorded. The catch is when a man uses the term, the Bible; you dont know what he is talking about. The fundamental scholar means the originals only. Absolute authority without error, resided only in the original manuscripts and every Bible in existence today has error mingled with truth. That is the general belief regarding the Bible. He does not believe any Bible in existence today (in any language) is Gods Word without error. His authority has HOLY BIBLE on the cover and according to him it is filled with glosses, omissions, additions, and errors. Anytime someone differs with him about his view of original inspiration, he accuses them of being a false prophet, a liberal, a modernist, etc. He condemns himself with his own mouth. The fundamentalist is guilty of doing the same thing to Bible truth that the modernist has been doing for years. The modernist is just more honest in the way he does it. COMPARE THE VIEWS MODERNIST: The original manuscripts contain the Word of God, but are not itself all the Word of God. There are human ideas in it. FUNDAMENTALIST: Every Bible in existence today has some of Gods Word but it also has some of the translators ideas in it. DIFFERENCE: The end result is the same. The modernist said that was the condition of the Bible from the beginning. The fundamentalist says it is in that condition today. MODERNIST: Bible writers were merely giving their cultural viewpoint when they stated that the husband is the head of the wife. This is not Gods will for us today. Cultures change. FUNDAMENTALIST: The King James translators were giving a cultural viewpoint when they translated 1 Peter 2:13. This is not Gods Word for us today. DIFFERENCE: No difference. The Bible in the modernists hand is the same as the one in the fundamentalists hand; which verse should be explained away is the only argument. MODERNIST: Bible writers were immature in their moral and spiritual development. We should judge if the various Old Testament passages of wrath fit the New Testament picture of Christs love. FUNDAMENTALIST: The translators of the King James Bible did not have the information and great scholarship about manuscripts, which are now available. We should judge which manuscripts are the most accurate to our idea of Christ. Scholars are able to do this for us.

21

DIFFERENCE: No difference. The fundamentalist wants us to trust him to tell us which part of the Bible is the most accurate. MODERNIST: There are minor discrepancies such as the recording of numbers in Scripture. Gods intent was not exact figures or words but to reveal doctrine. Even with the contradictions and discrepancies, Bible doctrine is unchanged. The general message is still clear. FUNDAMENTALIST: There are minor discrepancies in all translations. (See New Scofield Reference Bible footnote on page 473 for an example of this error.) Gods intent was not to give exact figures or words, but doctrine. DIFFERENCE: No difference, except how long it took for the Bible to become full of discrepancies. MODERNIST: The Bible was originally given by God and handed down by oral tradition. It was not written down until 200 BC Therefore, error crept in over that extended period of oral tradition. FUNDAMENTALIST: God gave The Bible in the original manuscripts, but through the process of copying over a period of hundreds of years, errors crept into all manuscripts. DIFFERENCE: None. The fundamentalist calls the modernist a false prophet, heretic, etc., while he himself does the same thing to Bible authority in a more subtle fashion. When the water gets too hot these men always adjust to a more subtle position. But, the goal is the same. He is the enemy to truth, Gods word, and he will oppose it regardless of the method. A fundamentalist is no better than a modernist when he holds up a book and says, This is Gods Word without error or mistake, when he believes it has errors and mistakes in it. He is a pretender of the faith instead of a contender for the faith when he makes a big ado about inerrant original manuscripts and believes every manuscript in Greek, Hebrew, English, or otherwise has errors in it. You may disagree with this author. But, you cant accuse me of lying to people about what I believe is Gods Word. I believe the King James Bible is Gods Word without error or mistake. I have a Book to which I can point a lost man and tell him he can trust eternity on everything written in it. Can you? Can your pastor? We anticipate the scholars answer to this article. Instead of looking at the predicament he is in with regard to absolute authority, he can only think about a scholars reason to reject it. Here it is: You dont have one Scripture to prove that God preserved His Word without error in an English Bible. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. (Matthew 24:25). And, how about II Timothy 3:16, Revelation 22:18-19, plus twenty more? They came from a KING JAMES BIBLE. Talk about the Greek and the ignorance of the translators and the archaic words but when the dust settles, please pick up ONE BOOK that is Gods Word without error or mistake, wave it before us and say, This is Gods Word. Raise your head toward heaven and say to God, I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right. (Psalm 119:128). You cant be an honest Christian without believing Gods Word.

22

The grammatically oriented scholar who worships the education received at his Alma Mater may laugh at ignorant Bible believers. However, we are not hypocrites. We will not use theological double-talk and accuse men of being modernists when we believe the same thing they believe about the Scriptures. A true fundamentalist is one who believes that he has the Word of God in his hand. He believes that BOOK is the absolute authority in all matters of faith and practice.

23

A MORE LITERAL TRANSLATION This phrase is frequently used to correct the supposed archaic or erroneous words in the King James Bible. It is another subtle approach to cast doubt upon the text of the Authorized Version. The statement suggests that the King James Bible does not accurately convey the real sense of the word. The inference is that a clearer translation is needed. The word literal is defined as referring to the natural or usual construction and implication of a writing or expression. It carries the idea of being true to the fact. When a preacher or scholar says, a more literal translation is he is accusing the King James Bible of not being true to fact. The scholar substitutes his mind for the mind of the Spirit. Some of the leading translations that use this phrase or the idea behind it are as follows: The New Scofield Reference Bible (NSRB) The Living Bible (LB) The New American Standard Bible (NASB) In the NSRB on page 205, the footnote states in reference to Numbers 28:4: Literally, between the two evenings The Word of God says, The one lamb shalt thou offer in the morning, and the other lamb shalt thou offer at evening. (Numbers 28:4). At evening and between the two evenings are certainly different. If the offering was between the evenings, when was it? Was it morning, evening, limbo, day, night, never-never land or what? Between the two evenings is another fabricated problem by the Bible critics to cast doubt on Gods Word. Nothing can be found in the Bible about two evenings. There is an eventide and evening, but no mention of two evenings in the Bible. A careful reading of Gods Word shows that a day has morning, noon, evening, eventide, night and midnight. The Bible believer will not fabricate new times in order to give a more literal translation. The Living Bible is filled with this more literal obsession. Almost every page has many of these supposed literal readings. Why did this book give a non-literal translation in the text and give the literal translation in the margin? It is as if the author is playing a game throughout the Living Bible and the object is to hide the Word of God. In the footnote on Genesis 1:2, he decided that no one has ever known or will know what God actually said. The footnote states: There is no right way to translate these words. If there is no right way to put Gods Words in the English language, it means we do not have all of Gods Word. The author, as early as Genesis 1:2, tells us that we dont have a portion of Gods Word. If this portion is impossible to translate, what about other portions? A NON-LITERAL BIBLE? If the literal readings are found in the footnotes, then the non-literal must be in the text. This is what the critical scholars have been trying to persuade folks all along. They believe their marginal comments are the Word of God. This is contrary to principle in the Word of God. God not only promised to preserve His Word (Isaiah 40:8; Isaiah 59:21), He promised that the

24

meaning would be preserved as well as the Word. If God did not preserve the meaning of the text as well the text itself, we would have a non-literal Bible, a totally useless piece of literature! The Lord Jesus Christ said: if it were not so, I would have told you (John 14:2). If the Lord meant He was going to prepare homes (LB) in John 14:1, He would have said so. The place of John 14:1 is clearly defined in Hebrews 9:12-ff. Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. (Hebrews 9:12)). The baptism with the Holy Ghost in Acts 1:5 and Acts 2 is precisely that. It is not the baptism by the Spirit given in 1 Corinthians 12:13. The message in Acts 2 is not directed to the church, which is the body of Christ. It is directed to Israel. See Acts 2:5, 2:14, 2:22 and 2:36. Some writers have recognized the problem of accusing the Bible of non-literal language when it affects their area of expertise. The fact that the Scriptures continually point to literal interpretations of what was formerly written adds evidence as to the method to be employed in interpreting the Word. Perhaps one of the strongest evidences for the literal method is the use the New Testament makes of the Old Testament. When the Old Testament is used in the New it is used only in a literal sense THINGS TO COME, J. Dwight Pentecost, p. 10. Of course, Pentecost does not believe the King James Bible is without error. The error bothers his prophecy and he complains, but he does not see the greater problemwithout a literal translation, he will have no sure word of prophecy at all. He is referring to the originals when he uses the terms, Word, Scriptures, Old Testament, New Testament. He does see the problem of accusing the originals with non-literality. Like others, he has never asserted the fact that the originals are not around today, and if God gave His Word by inspiration and could not preserve it, we would all be in a fix. When I refer to the Bible, I am talking about the King James Bible, which I have in my hand. God gave His Word and meant what He said when He said it. God has preserved His Word without including second-sense, non-literal, clouded statements. Wherefore, sirs, be of good cheer: for I believe God, that it shall be even as it was told me. (Acts 27:25).

25

IS THE LIVING BIBLE REALLY ALIVE? The living Bible is a product of one mans efforts to put Biblical language into everyday idiom. Kenneth Taylor, a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, initiated the book in order to make the Bible more understandable to his children. However, Taylor made several serious mistakes in producing The Living Bible. In this chapter, we will briefly examine the work and prove it is just another translation with many problems. 1. The major error of The Living Bible is the very reason for its existencethe idea that Scripture is understandable if the words are in modern English. 2. The Living Bible is a product of one man and almost every page reflects his private interpretation of Scripture. 3. The Living Bible follows humanistic biblical criticism. 4. The Living Bible is a book with filthy, gutter-type language in it. FIRST ERROR Modern slang does not help anyone understand the Bible. The big business of publishing houses is to sell Bibles. In order to sell Bibles, the book companies must invent slogans and persuasive arguments. One of these Madison Avenue techniques is to claim that the King James Bible is full of old, archaic words and that this NEW VERSION opens up your understanding, clarifies all obscure passages, gives Gods Word in language we all understand etc., etc. Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may have free course, and be glorified, even as it is with you. (2 Thessalonians 3:1). The King James Bible has no copyright on it. Therefore, if a man wants to make money selling a Bible, he cant protect his power (I Timothy 6:10) with the KJB. So, he makes a brand new translation and gets a copyright so no one but himself can make money from his Bible. He adopts a sales pitch to sell his Bible, for God will not distribute it for him and he must resort to the lusts of the flesh in order to get it out. The same technique used to sell the flood of Bibles has been used to sell cars, houses, magazines, beer, cigarettes, and Preparation H. The Word of God is not bound by much foolishness. The Authorized Version (KJV) does not need carnival tactics to preserve or promote it. God' power does what man cannot do. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. (John 10:4). The BOOK says that the Holy Spirit opens itnot the street language found in so-called bibles. 13 Which things also we speak not in the words which mans wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with the spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1Corinthians 2:13-14).

26

A man could get a Bachelors Degree, Masters Degree, Doctors Degree, and still MISS EVERYTHING IN THE WORD OF GOD. He could get every commentary, word study, and lexicon and still know no more about GODS WORD than a white-tailed buck knows about the hue of any color in the spectrum. It is the Lord that gives understanding and until God opens your eyes (Psalms 119:18), they will remain shut. When you found something wrong with the only Bible God ever wrote (Isaiah 8:20), God pulled the blinds down. Writing your own Bible wont help, because you sign your own death warrant when you do. Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! (Isaiah 5:21). According to Newsweek, September 27, 1971, page 102, Ken Taylor consulted a psychiatrist because he was afflicted with a loss of speech after completing The Living Bible. But the psychiatrist wasnt much help either. He thought I lost my voice, Taylor croaked last week, because there I was, a fundamentalist, tampering with Gods words. God give us more psychiatrists like that one! SECOND ERROR The second error of the Living Bible is that it reflects Taylors private interpretation of Scripture. Here are some of the examples. In Genesis 1:1-2, Taylor gives the private interpretation that God created the earth in a shapeless, chaotic mass. In case Taylor forgot it, (if he ever knew it), God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:40). God has never created a CHAOTIC MASS! God created it not in vain. (Isaiah 45:18). Taylor forgot what he said in Genesis 1:1-2 and condemned himself in Isaiah 45:18. For Jehovah created the heavens and earth and put everything in place, and he made the world to be lived in, not to be an empty chaos. --The Living Bible. Of course, when a man writes a book and claims its THE LIVING BIBLE, the product of man rises no higher than its source. A few pages are all it takes for it to begin to smell like an outhouse in southern China. Taylor does the same thing in Acts 11:26. He forgot that he had called some folks Christians in Acts 8:15 and then in 11:26 says, believers were first called Christians. Why Taylor calls believers Christians in 8:15 and then contradicts himself in 11:26 is a mystery that only Romans 7:21 can solve. Another example of private interpretation is Taylors substitution of hats and head coverings for hair in 1 Corinthians 11:4, 6. The only covering in 1 Corinthians 11 is hair (11:15) and if a man has long hair, he is a shame. According to the private interpretation of Taylor, men can have long hair (hair which covers the neck and ears) and women must wear hats in church. Someone says, My, how The Living Bible makes everything so clear. No, it just gives a private presentation of Scripture, which can be found at the foot of many pulpits today.

27

Another private interpretation is Taylors substitution of drawing straws in Acts 1:26 for the casting of the lot. Proverbs 16:22 says, the lot is cast into the lap. Isnt there a difference between casting and drawing? They sound like opposites to me. THIRD ERROR Taylor put the same old tune in The Living Bible as is in the RV, RSV, ASV, NASV, etc., etc. Same song, different keythe oldest manuscripts are the best. Brass was unknown at the time of the building of the tabernacle. Therefore, it was a BRONZE ALTAR instead of a brazen altar. (Exodus 27:1-3). A whale is not a fish (even though Jesus said it was) and therefore a whale did not swallow Jonah. Jonah 1:17 and Matthew 12:40. Substitute sea-creatures for whales in Genesis 1:21 so Jonah and Matthew could be corrected later on. Jesus begs John the Baptist to baptize him, Please do it, for I must do all that is right. (Matthew 3:15). Take I Timothy 3:16 and mutilate it so that the words God was manifest in the flesh are omitted. Omit Mark 9:44 and Mark 8:46 and insert a mutilated Mark 9:48 so that hell is what a man says, instead of what GOD SAID. An evangelist once said that when men start air-conditioning hell, it is a good sign that they are getting ready to move in. FOURTH ERROR Taylor didnt learn some of the words he put in The Living Bible from God. He wasnt taught them at Dallas Theological Seminary, either. He got them right out of the gutter. I can only assume he wants his children to hear the language he used. The filthy words are also in one of the childrens editions of The Living Bible. Saul boiled with rage. You son of a bitch! he yelled at him. --1 Samuel 20:30 The Living Bible. Do you think Taylor got that from God? Some man may, Well, men curse and Taylor was just telling it like it is. There are a whole lot of filthy words and deeds this world says and does but God never gives a detailed account of them. Do you want your pastor getting in the pulpit and describing in vivid detail the immorality of an X-rated movie house? For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. (Ephesians 5:12). Taylor has Elijah saying in I Kings 18:27, with reference to Baal: Perhaps he is talking to someone, or he is out sitting on the toilet. The Living Bible

28

What was the point of inserting something so ridiculous without any warrant from the language for doing so? Taylor reminds us of a little child who sniggers at any mention of the pottie. The only person in worse shape than Kenneth Taylor, is the Christian who buys a Living Bible and thinks that there is one spark of life in it. Gods Word is not the same as Ken Taylors. Ken Taylors bible is certainly not Gods Word. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Timothy 4:3-4).

29

WHAT ABOUT THE NEW AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION? The NASV is one of the latest in a long line of Bible perversions. Many preachers, following a professor or bookstore recommendation, encourage new converts to buy a NASV. These preachers, without exception, do not believe the infallible word of God is in any book on the face of this earth. If that appears to be a prejudiced statement, ask one of these, which Bible is, Gods Word without error. Prepare yourself for a shocking or evasive answer. If he tells you the Greek is Gods Word, let him point out which one of the Greek texts is Gods Word without error. Here are some of the perversions you will find in a NASV: firstborn subtracted in Matthew 1:25. without a cause subtracted in Matthew 5:22. Both verses in the NASV attack the Person and Work of Jesus Christ. Our Lord Jesus Christ was the firstborn of Mary just as you find it in Gods Holy Word, the King James Bible. The only person who would want firstborn out would be one who wanted to teach the perpetual virginity of Mary, or attack the virgin birth of Christ. Firstborn implies that others were born of Mary at a later date. And indeed, there were. See Mark 6:3. Firstborn also protects the doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Our Lord Jesus Christ was angry in Mark 3:5 and if the reading of the NASV in Matthew 5:22 is the Word of God, Jesus Christ was a sinner and in danger of judgment. And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other. (Mark 3:5). But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. (Matthew 5:22). But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever shall say to his brother, 'Raca,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever shall say, 'You fool,' shall be guilty {enough to go} into the fiery hell. (Matthew 5:22NAS). The Word of God says, angry, with his brother WITHOUT A CAUSE The NASV removes the phrase, making Christ in danger of judgment. Those two subtractions should be enough to convince any Christian. A preacher who recommends such perversion in the place of the Word of God is a novice in matters of divine authority and has disqualified himself from Christian leadership since he evidently does not know what God said. Mark 7:16 is missing in the NASV as well as half of Mark 9:49. In the 1963 edition published by Broadman Press. Mark 9:44 and Mark 9:46 are totally eliminated. Both verses deal with Hell. Gods people who wish to please our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ should sever and avoid any connection with such perversion of His Word.

30

WHATS WRONG WITH LUKE 24:40? Theres nothing wrong with it, if you are a Bible believer. The King James Version reads: And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. (Luke 24:40). But the Christian school can not be trusted to believe Gods Word today. Christian schools have become the breeding grounds for Bible correctors. When graduates walk out the doors with so-called Bibles under their arm that omit, add, and change Gods Word, somebodysomewhere, should sense that the educational system has the proverbial rotten apple in it. The New American Standard Version has become the Bible of this generation of Bible correctors. The NASV reads: 40 (See marginal note.1) The marginal note adds that some mss. add verse 40. Luke 24:40 is not the only verse shoved out of the text by the NASV translators. They took Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28, Luke 17:36, 23:17, 24:40, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, 15:34, 24:7, 28:29, and Romans 16:24 out. The preacher who uses the NASV, needs only memorize See marginal note, and he will have memorized 14 verses in the NASV New Testament! One would think that men who have been called to preach and teach Gods Word would leave the Book alone and correct their sermons by it. Not so in this feeble generation; they correct the Book by their scholarship. Every major fundamental school in existence today has faculty members who ridicule the King James Bible (when that very school was built by a man who believed it and preached it) and promote the New American Standard Bible. These schools brag about graduates who go out and build great works and win souls forgetting that Pentecostalism, Jehovahs Witnesses, Campbellism, Adventism, and all other heresies are building great works and winning souls. What has happened to men who trembled at Gods Word and would rather cut their own tongue out than cut one word from Gods Book? Is this the present generation that is described in Romans 1:25? Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature, more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

31

THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION (NIV), or, THE TOWER OF BABEL VERSION (GENESIS 11:14) Although this Bible professes to be a completely fresh translation we find that it is a rehash of the same Westcott-Hort perversion as one would find in the RV of 1881, the ASV of 1901 and the NASV of 1965. Westcott and Hort, two Bible critics of the 1800s believed that a portion of the Word of God had been lost. According to them, a great portion of this lost word was found c. 1850 AD Two major manuscripts contained this lost word. Vaticanus (located in the Vatican library) and Sinaiticus (found in a monastery wastebasket at Mount Sinai) are the two manuscripts promoted by Westcott and Hort. The Revised Version of 1881, the ASV of 1901 and all other new translations depend more or less upon the leaven of the Vaticanus-Sinaiticus text. The Vaticanus-Sinaiticus superior text hypothesis is wrong at its foundation, i.e., God lost His Word until 1854 AD The text is also wrong in attacking the Deity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. The bibles which come from this corrupt source do two things: 1. Attack the Person of Jesus Christ. 2. Attack the Word of Jesus Christ. THE NIV ATTACKS THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST BY OMITTING HIS NAME OR HIS TITLES Christ is omitted in the following verses: John 4:42, Acts 16:31, II Thessalonians 1:8, II Thessalonians 2:2, I Thessalonians 3:11, I John 1:7, Revelation 1:9, Revelation 12:17, I Corinthians 16:23, Galatians 4:7, Galatians 6:15 and Romans 16:24. Jesus Christ is omitted in I Corinthians 16:22 and II Timothy 4:22. Jesus is omitted in II Corinthians 4:6 and I Peter 5:10. The Lord Jesus Christ is omitted in Colossians 1:2. Lord is omitted in Luke 23:42. THE NIV ATTACKS THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST BY MUTILATING THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON IN JOHN 1. The NIV reads in John 1:18 as follows: No man has ever seen God, but God the only son, who is at the Fathers side, has made him known.

32

The Lord Jesus Christ is not Gods only Son. Angels are sons of God (Job 38:7, Genesis 6:2). Adam was the son of God (Luke 3:38). Saved people are sons of God (Hebrews 12:6). The Lord Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son. This is a Biblical term exclusively reserved for the Lord Jesus Christ. The Word was God (John 1:1). The Word was the only begotten of the Father (John 1:14), who was also the only begotten Son (John 1:18). Only begotten is a Biblical term to describe the unique relationship between the eternal Father and the eternal Son. THE NIV ATTACKS THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST BY MUTILATING I TIMOTHY 3:16. The Bible says: God was manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:15). The NIV says, He appeared in a body WHO APPEARED IN A BODY? What kind of statement is it to say, He appeared in a body? That is an indefinite statement that says nothing. Every person reading these words appeared in a body. So what? The unusual thing is not for a human to appear in a body, BUT FOR GOD TO BE MANIFEST IN THE FLESH. If you cant see the difference or the importance, you need new glasses. I dont care if you have had twenty years of Greek and teach at a fundamental Bible schoolif you cant see what the NIV did to mutilate the Deity of Jesus Christ either you can not read, you are following men, or you are not saved. THE NIV ATTACKS THE WORD OF THE LORD JESUS The NIV attacks the Word of the Lord by omitting all of Matthew 23:14, Mark 7:16, Mark 9:44, Mark 9:46, Luke 17:36, Matthew 17:21, Matthew 18:11, Luke 23:17, John 5:4, Acts 28:29, Romans 16:24. The NIV also leaves out, adds words, and mutilates hundreds of other verses. On the back cover of the NIV, the publishers state, it is completely accurate But in the note inserted between Mark 16:8 and 9, the NIV states: The most reliable early manuscripts omit Mark 16:9-20 If the most reliable omit Mark 16:9-20, why does the completely accurate NIV have Mark 16:9-20 in it? This same error is found in John 7:53. The NIV hangs itself in Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24 and I Corinthians 11:25. Referring to the new testament in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, the NIV omits the adjective, NEW. But when the NIV give I Corinthians 11:25, it reads NEW. In fact, it puts the Words of the Lord Jesus in I Corinthians 11:25 in quotation marks. A direct quote! The question that comes to us is: If the Lord Jesus said NEW in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24 according to the direct quote in 1 Corinthians 11:25, why did the NIV leave it out in Matthew and Mark? The NIV also reveals itself when it has the Lord Jesus losing Judas Iscariot after the NIV said he was a devil. I am still trying to understand how a devil could lose his salvation! In John 6:70: Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil! NIV In John 17:12:

33

None has been lost except the child of hell NIV Of course, a lot of things happen in the NIV, not only do the fish and bread multiply, but the 70 grows to 72 in Luke 10:1,17. The NIV does not know the difference between life and soul according to the Mark 8:3536 footnote. (Neither did Judge Rutherford). The Greek word means either life or soul. (NIV) Man has life, but he is also a soul. Man is a living soul (Genesis 2:7). The Bible does not say man is a souling soul; neither does it say man is a living life. The soul is alive but life is not soul. If soul is life and life is soul, these scholars need to explain how SOULS who were DEAD (slain NIV) called out in a loud voice (NIV) Revelation 6:9-11. If they have forfeited their life, how are they still alive? These scholars have the same problem as The Diaglott and The New World Translation (Jehovahs False Witnesses Russellites No Hellers, take your pick), when faced with LIFE AND SOUL in the same verse where a LIVING SOUL is found. Their gears strip, gaskets split, and they sputter through the verse. The first man Adam became a living being I Corinthians 15:45 (NIV). If a man is BEING, is he not LIVING? When the NIV said the Greek word, PSUCHE means life or soul, why didnt it stick to it? Why chicken out when sosan (LIVING) and Pseuche (SOUL) appear next to each other? If the NIV was honest in the footnote of Mark 8:35-36, then I Corinthians 15:45 in the NIV would read, Adam became a living life. This would be ridiculous repetition. It shows the NIV for what it is. The Bible believer should put the NIV where the ASV, RSV, NASV, and NEB have gone with the flowers and grass that wither. Isaiah 40:8.

34

WHAT ABOUT THE NEW SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE? We realize that this study is incidental to most of the modern fundamental generation. Those who have fallen into the Bible translation market will be blind to these observations. However, the Bible believer who believes he has a copy of the infallible Word of God in his hand should receive some valuable instruction from these comments. If you have a NSRB, please check out our remarks. If they are false, ignore us, but, if the remarks are true, then the NSRB stands convicted of being another impostor in a long line of bible perversions. It seems that this age is an age of gullibility. A Reverend is assumed to be right no matter what he says. If a man associates with fundamentalists, then many think he must be fundamental. We know of a religious skunk that was the pastor of an independent Baptist church and sued another independent Baptist church for money! He might be a Rev. in mans eyes, but he is a hypocrite in Gods eyes. See I Timothy 6:10. When books are printed which claim to be Gods Word, but are not, they are religious skunks. Just because Holy Bible is on the cover, there is no guarantee that the words therein are Gods Words. THE NEW SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE TEXT IS NOT THE TEXT OF THE KING JAMES VERSION In the introduction to the 1967 edition, page v., this statement is made: This revision, like the 1909 and 1917 editions, is printed in the text of the Authorized King James Version of 1611, but with certain word changes. The NSRB is not like the 1909 and 1917 editions. THERE WERE NO WORD CHANGES IN THE TEXT OF THE 1909 AND 1917 editions. The only way the NSRB, the 1909 and 1917 editions of the SRB are similar, is that both bear the name of SCOFIELD. The Bibles are not the same. The King James Bible reads in I Samuel 13:1: Saul reigned one year The NSRB reads in I Samuel 13:1: Saul was years old Who could say both of those statements are the same? The King James Bible reads in Matthew 12:30: For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whales belly The NSRB reads in Matthew 12:40: For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish

35

In Acts 2:3, the word, like is omitted from the NSRB. There is no notation at all of the omission. How could a man say that the text was the text of the King James in light of this? THE FOOTNOTES OF THE NEW SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE ARE MISLEADING The NSRB Committee stated on page VI: In these notes, obscure and difficult passages of Scripture are elucidated. There are some helps in the footnotes. But, the help is due to the original Scofield Reference Bible notes of 1909 and 1917 that were not altered by the 1967 committee. The new footnotes and changes confuse and hide Scripture truth rather than elucidating it. Here are some examples: Page 260: Rahabs lie (vv.4-5), not to be taken as an example Too bad God did not listen to the advice of the editors in James 2:25: Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? (James 2:25). Page 1001: Referring to Matthew 6:13, the footnote states: Eminent textual authorities believe that it was added by later hands They are making reference to a portion of Matthew 6:13. approach to Scripture help a Bible student? How could that critical

Page 1221: When the word, itself is changed to himself in Romans 8:16, there are no Greek authorities cited. The reason is simple. There are no manuscripts available to justify the change. It is true that the Holy Spirit is a Person. But, it is also true that one could refer to a person using a neuter noun or pronoun. Who is that? IT is Joe Smith. Our Lord Jesus Christ is called that holy thing in Luke 1:24. No one reading Scripture would deny the personality of Jesus Christ even though He is referred to as that holy thing. No one who has read John 14 and John 15 would deny the personality of the Holy Spirit even though He is referred to as itself in Romans 8. It is never right to tear down one passage in order to strengthen doctrine in another passage. It seems that in their zeal to strengthen the

36

doctrine of the personality of the Holy Spirit, the NSRB board of editors attacked the doctrine of the Bible in Romans 8. The NSRB is not what it purports to be. It is certainly contrary to the intent and doctrines of the Scofield Reference Bible, 1909 and 1917 editions. The NSRB is certainly not the text of the King James Version. If words are changed, it is not the same text. We realize that some of Gods people have bought or have had given to them a copy of the NSRB. Many would not be aware of these problems. We do not say these things to condemn or criticize them. We do ask that they check the passages and footnotes out and do that which pleases our Lord Jesus Christ. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:18).

37

EIGHT REASONS WHY WE WILL CLOSE THE OPEN BIBLE After reading the following, an executive from Thomas Nelson Publishers called me. He was upset over the article and tried to explain to me the reasoning behind them publishing The Open Bible. During the course of the conversation I asked the man if and when he was saved. His answer to me was that he held membership in a church. I asked again, When were you saved? He could give no definite answer. Looking through the concise student edition of THE OPEN BIBLE, I am wondering how Bible publishers sleep at night. Is there no conscience in them? How can a publishing house print King James Version on a Bible while changing the words in the text as well as attacking the text in their translation notes? How can they talk about THE BIBLE when they dont believe there is ONE in existence? If God wrote understanding (Greek dianoias) in Ephesians 1:18 (KJV), He did not write heart (Greek kardias) as we find in the translation note of the Open Bible. Which one did God write? Both? Are we to think (like some professors) that BOTH of them are the Word of God? If God wrote TWO BIBLES how do we know which one we should follow? Isnt a doubleminded man unstable in all his way? (James 1:8). If God meant heart in Ephesians 1:18, why didnt he say so? Why did we have to wait on The Open Bible to tell us God meant to say heart instead of dianoias understanding? I am sure that many Christians, like me, assumed that The Open Bible was the King James Version with some study helps added. It was not until I seriously read the notes and changes that I knew the poisonous character of this so-called Bible. We are aware that some Christians and others will accuse us of nit-picking because we have attacked one of their prima donnas that push their Bible. If these things we say are not so answer us. If they are, put The Open Bible on the shelf with the many other imitations and get you a copy of the Word of God. 1. It claims to be The King James Version. But the words are changed. If words are changed, it is not The King James Version. It is another Bible. 2. If there is justification for changing some words, where do we stop? Why not go ahead with the other changes, i.e., itself to Himself in Romans 8:16; Easter to Passover in Acts 12:3, etc. 3. This is a subtle approach whereby the Christian school student is taught to change the outdated, archaic, poorly translated King James Version. 4. It sets the high school graduate up so that when he goes to college and hears that the NASV, RSV, or NWT is a better translation than the King James Bible, the student, having been brainwashed by the Student Edition of The Open Bible, has no defense. 5. The Open Bible gives another translation after almost every verse in it. These translations are very questionable. In some case, they are private interpretations. Others are absolutely stupid and void of spiritual understanding. They violate the integrity of Scripture. Here are some samples: In I Corinthians 11:1, Ephesians 5:1 and I Thessalonians 1:6, we are to be imitation Christians according to The Open Bible and the RSV. That is real development of Christian character! I John 5:7 states that (with reference to the Godhead) These three are one-united. There is much more in the Biblical statement than the idea of united.

38

I Corinthians 15:43 (KJV) It is sown in dishonor The Open Bible suggests ugly for dishonor. It is sown ugly??? In James 5:14, The Open Bible elders of the church are to rub oil on the women who are sick. Is that why 1 Corinthians 7:1 is changed from It is good for a man not to touch a woman to read, It is good for a man not to live in marriage with a woman? In 1 Corinthians 14:1, The Open Bible preacher is to preach infallibly. Shades of the Pope! This is not a mere mistake by the man who inserted the term, for he does it again in 1 Corinthians 14:22: but (infallible preaching) serveth not for them that believe not, but them which believe. Of course the daughters can preach (Acts 2:17) infallibly right along with the men. After all, we need infallible women preachers to go with the women deacons of Romans 16:1! In John 8:55, the children of the Devil who accused Jesus of having a devil had not appreciated God. The Open Bible certainly blesses those whom God curses. The Word of God says, Ye have not known him; but I know him Are we to believe that Jesus merely appreciated His heavenly Father? One of the most ridiculous things I have ever seen is the translation of Nicolaitanes in Revelation 2:6 make believe Christians. No sane Bible student anywhere would make such an error. The definition is nowhere near the Greek or English. The Greek word is composed of a verb that means, to conquer and a noun that means people. It is not even close to make believe Christians. The Hamans of Bible correction always hang themselves on their own gallows and The Open Bible does it here. Revelation 2:6 says God hates the deeds of the Nicolaitanes and Revelation 2:15 states that He hates their doctrine. According to The Open Bible we are to imitation Christians in 1 Corinthians 11:1 and Ephesians 5:1. If God hates make believe Christians (Revelation 2:6) how can we be imitators (Ephesians 5:1) and have Gods blessings? The word imitator carries a lower meaning than follower. Galatians 3:24 justified by faith is said to be cleared of all guilt. But again, the doctrinal ignorance of this Bible shows. Justification is not just a clearing of all guilt but on the positive side it is also an imputation of righteousness. To have the guilt removed but remain without the positive aspect of justification is to be incomplete. Our sin was reckoned upon the Lord Jesus Christ for He was made to be sin for us (2 Corinthians 5:21), but also, His righteousness was imputed to our account. And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. (Philippians 3:9). 6. The Open Bible is inconsistent in the suggested translation of various terms. In fact, the perversion changes words with no apparent design other than to attack the King James Bible. These are found immediately after the verse. Here are some examples: In Matthew 1:19, the King James Version privily is changed to secretly. When the KJV reads secretly in John 11:28, The Open Bible changes it to privately. What is this but a deliberate attack upon the King James Bible?

39

The Open Bible changes hyssop to a branch in John 19:29 but leaves hyssop in Exodus 12:11. Hypocrites are changed to insincere in Matthew 6:5 but are allowed to remain hypocrites in Matthew 23:13,5. But when the KJV translates anupokritos as without dissimulation in Romans 12:9, The Open Bible corrects it with hypocrisy! Revelation 22:19 cannot be ignored. The King James Bible says: the book of life The Textus Receptus says: Biblou tas Zoas The Open Bible says this should be THE TREE OF LIFE Now, how did Biblou become tree? It didnt. It never was and never will be. It would appear that Thomas Nelson Publishers are dedicated to destroying the Reformation Text as witnessed by their NEW KING JAMES BIBLE that is as corrupt as THE OPEN BIBLE. They are being helped along in their corruption by many gullible preachers. The Open Bible reading given in Revelation 22:19 comes from the apostate New American Standard Version, The Good News For Modern Man, and others in their train. The same thing happens in Ephesians 3:9 where koinonia is corrected to read, dispensation. There is no way to translate koinonia which means, fellowship, as dispensation unless there is a total disregard for the Textus Receptus and an acceptance of the corrupt Greek texts behind the modern perversion of the Word of God. Also, notice how dianoias (understanding) becomes kardias (heart) in Ephesians 1:18. It is very clear that The Open Bible that claims to be the King James Version is a wolf in sheeps clothing. The Greek text behind the King James as well as the English itself is changed to agree with the RSV, NASV, and Living Bible! There is a private interpretation forced upon Psalm 12:6-7 where the words of the Lord are not preserved, but rather the godly are preserved. This is so whoever changed Psalm 12:6-7 can change Ephesians, Revelation, and anything else he pleases! 7. The verse reference system is fouled up. The Church of Christ preacher saw to it that the John 3:5 born of water got the standard Campbellite treatment. He inserted Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, and the washing of Titus 3:5 to explain the text like any so-called Church of Christ minister. In Acts 2:5 the Jews who were out of every nation are cross-referenced with Zechariah 2:11-12. Zechariah 2:11 says and many nations shall be joined to the Lord. There is a great difference! Again, the reference places the millennial prophecy of Zechariah as fulfilled in Acts 2. The Campbellites believe the Kingdom was established in Act 1. 1 Thessalonians 4:16 which is a reference to the pre-tribulational rapture of the Body of Christ is tied to Matthew 24:30 which is a reference to the post-tribulational return of Christ to this earth. There are many confusing references; we list only three. And, no wonder that this confusion should occur. On pp. 1243-1244 under Last Things, conflicting views on prophecy are covered. Conservative interpreters are divided into four divisions: postmillennial; a millennial; dispensational premillennial; and historical premillennial. (p. 1243)

40

Amillennialists are conservative? Since when? Whoever wrote the article is misleading for there is no such thing as an historical premillennialist who is mediating between amillennialism and dispensationalism. (p. 1244). This great study which is going to equip the student to do all for the glory of God concludes with this theological whimper: This is not a complete depiction of all the varying views, nor is the purpose to decide for the Bible student; the latter is best left up to study, prayer, and the Holy Spirit. (p. 12449). A more literal translation of this jargon is that a Campbellite, tongues-speaking healer, some weak-headed and hearted Baptists and others participated in the preparation of this Bible, straddled the fence on all such issues in order to sell a lot of them to Christian schools. 8. The spelling changes. with extreme care we have changed alway to always Wow, what a tremendous leap of faith! What great advances in Biblical science and spiritual growth this will produce in the students life! We are overwhelmed with such education. Then they change alway to always in John 7:6: your time is always.. (Open Bible) AND LEAVE IT UNCHANGED IN MATTHEW 28:20! I am with you alway If the students were that sloppy with a term paper, we would give them an F. Some words are changed and the reader is not even told about it. Example: rereward in Joshua 6:9 is changed to rearward in the text and then to rear guard at the end of the verse. Why not right guard? In fact, why not left guard? After all, if mind is heart and book is tree, why cant rere be left? It is not Gods fault if you never learned your phonics or how to use a Websters Dictionary to look up rere. Joel 2:24; Joel 3:13 and Isaiah 63:2. Here is another example of the extreme care in the Open Bible. The King James Version has been criticized for its spelling of a word, FATS, in Joel 2:24 and Joel 3:13. The critics say it should be VATS since the containers that hold the overflow from the winepresses are in view. However, the King James Version again demonstrates its superiority over German spelling, archaic problems, Hebrew characters, etc. The Open Bible missed the winefat which someone walked in (Isaiah 63:3) and changed the King James Version only in Joel 2:24 and 3:13 from fats to vats, thinking they were doing a great service to mankind. The vessels that hold the fat of the grapes are identified with that which they hold. Since fats are in the vessels and it is that for which they exist, there is nothing wrong with calling the containers, FATS. The English languages (and other languages) are replete with examples. The metal fixtures, glass, and wire stuck above your head carry LIGHT and have become identified with that which comes from it. We say, Turn on the light (flip the switch), or That light has a bad connection. (The wires are loose in the fixture), or Who will install the lights? (Who will lay the wire and nail the fixture to the ceiling?) What is wrong with identifying a container with that which it holds? The painting is called that

41

because the act of painting produced it. Is the picture clear? Why be a Bible corrector when you can be a Bible believer? 9. The introduction is misleading. Example: Under the heading, The Bible and Reading, this statement is made: The purpose of your student Bible is to emphasize to you the importance of reading not just any book but THE BOOK, THE BIBLE, GODS HOLY WORD! Now, you would think that these men believe there is ONE BIBLE and THAT BOOK IS GODS HOLY WORD. But they dont believe it for a minute. That is said so gullible Christians can be beguiled and fleeced. On Page 1223: many agree with the statement of Professor F. F. Bruces that The Revised Version with these marginal references is still the most useful edition of the Bible for the careful student who knows no language but English. The Old Testament is especially recognized as being a great improvement for accuracys sake over the KJV. The same article states on page 1222: inasmuch as no ancient manuscripts of the Greek New Testament arrived in England until 1628, those responsible for this greatest of all versions did not have the advantage of the best Greek text. Now this is the same story Westcott and Hort sold in the 1800s. Since the King James translators did not have the best Greek text, i.e., Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, we need to correct the corrupt readings of the King James Version with them. This is the same approach as men who say, I love the King James Version. then tell us it is full of errors. They wouldnt treat their wife like that. Do you think God is going to let them get by with that attitude toward HIS BOOK? Page 1225 of The Open Bible states that The Good News For Modern Man (the bloodless bible) has been much used as an instruments of evangelism for persons outside the church. As far as I am concerned as a pastor and a parent, The Open Bible is a CLOSED BIBLE. My children at home, church, and school will not use it.

42

YOU CANT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER The New King James Bible is another Bible perversion in a long line of perversions. Thomas Nelson, Inc., of Nashville, Tennessee published it in 1979. The latest diversion on the Bible issue is to produce SEVERAL KING JAMES BIBLES so that the Christian will not be able to find THE BIBLE. Bible publishers (those who make merchandise of the Word of God) are now making an assault on the Word of God from another flank. In the past, they tried The American Standard Version (1901), The Revised Standard Version (1952), The New American Standard Version (1965), etc. They told us these versions were to update the Bible. But when we found that these Bibles were based on manuscripts that differed from the King James Bible, they changed tactics. The second assault on the Word of God was to take the Scofield Reference Bible (the King James Bible with reference notes) and use its name while putting the apostate manuscript readings into the text. They called this Bible The New Scofield Reference Bible, and claimed it was the King James Bible. They hoped that gullible Christians would judge it according to appearance. Some did, but some of us did not. We recognized the ASV readings of 1901 in the text and the Roman Catholic sacrament of water baptism in the footnote of Acts 8. Bible publishers are back with a new song and dance. King James Bible II went down the drain but now the New King James Bible is on the scene. The idea behind this bootlegging is to get the Christian so confused that he will not be able to discern WHICH King James Bible is THE King James Bible. Produce the KJV II, The KJV III, The Revised King James Bible, The New King James Bible, The Amplified King James Bible, The Living King James Bible, The Preferred King James Bible, so no one will know where the Word of God is. The New King James Bible is not the King James Bible. After comparing the two, the reader can easily see this. There are over two hundred differences of spellings, word order, omissions or additions within the first four chapters of Matthew alone! Here are some of the changes in the text: NKJV Matthew 1:23 Matthew 5:5 Matthew 11:23 Matthew 12:40 Matthew 20:20 John 4:24 Luke 19:24 Acts 12:4 Acts 7:38 Acts 3:19 Acts 19:37 Romans 1:25 Romans 1:18 Romans 4:25 Romans 8:16 I Corinthians 11:2 I Timothy 6:20 WORD OF GOD the virgin (note emphasis given to Mary) a virgin (the gentle) the meek Hades (no translation) hell Fish whale Kneeling down (eliminates worship of Jesus) worshipping God is Spirit God is a Spirit Mina pound Passover Easter Congregation church so that when Temples churches Exchanged changed Suppress hold Because of for Himself (No mss. Anywhere reads himself) itself Traditions ordinances Knowledge science

43

There are many more. The only footnote with comment in this Bible casts doubt on the authority of the passage in I John 5:7-8. The footnote reads: The words from in heaven (v.7) through on earth (v.8) are from the Latin Bible, although three Greek mss. from the 15th Century and later also contain them. Jerry Falwell says about the NKJV: This new edition preserves all of the truth and authority of the original We can expect that from Falwell. After all, a preacher who has Eldridge Cleaver on his TV program and puts Elizabeth Taylors picture on the front page of his church paper cannot be taken seriously when it comes to discerning truth and error. W. A. Criswell says: It is still the great authoritative, fundamental book that we have used for centuries. Unfortunately, he may also think the Southern Baptist Convention is still the fundamental Bible believing group it was a century ago. You cant judge a book by its cover and that is especially true in the Bible business. There are too many profiteers making money offering Gods people shortcuts and bypasses to spiritual discernment in the form of up to date, easily read, modern English Bibles. OPEN LETTER TO A BAPTIST AUTHOR I am shocked that you recommend the New King James Version as being better than the King James Bible. In your book you criticize the Arianism in the footnote of the ASV 1901 regarding John 9:38. I thoroughly agree with you. Any Bible that attacks the worship given to Jesus Christ should be rejected. The ASV did it in the footnote, but your New King James Bible did it in THE TEXT in Matthew 20:20. The New King James Version eliminated the Deity of Jesus and has the mother of Zebedees sons kneeling but no longer worshipping! If proskuneo is not worship in Matthew 20:20, then neither is it worship in Matthew 4:10. Consider the results of that! Why would you recommend a Bible that eliminates the worship of Jesus in the text of Matthew 20:20 while rejecting Bibles that eliminate worship in footnotes? The reason for publishing the New King James Version, according to the Thomas Nelson Publishers, was to make it more accurate; replace obsolete words with todays equivalents; restores and protects the originally intended beauty, authority The whole line of such thought is evident animosity towards the Authorized Version of 1611 and the love of the money which NEW bibles bring from gullible Christians pocketbooks. These men are ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth (2 Timothy 3:7), but they certainly come to great amounts of money. Why would you refrain from attacking the integrity, authority and beauty of the Authorized Version of 1611 in your book but join those who attack it by promoting the New King James Version? This is inconsistency to the highest degree and be sure your sins will find you out.

44

GOOD NEWS OR BAD NEWS FOR ANCIENT MAN? The Bible named Good News For Modern Man is in reality Bad News For Ancient Man. First, there is no such thing as modern man. Man is the same sinner he was 5,980 years ago. His heart is as wicked as ever. He does not need modern paths; he needs the old paths that God laid out in times past. Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. (Jeremiah 6:16). Second, there is no good news in a translation that omits the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. The precious blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is omitted in these verses: Matthew 27:4; 27:24; 27:25; Acts 5:28; 20:28; Romans 3:25; 5:9; Ephesians 1:7; 2:13; Colossians 1:14; 1:20; Hebrews 10:19; I Peter 1:9; Revelation 1:5, 5:9. How can there be good news in a translation that omits the only ground for the remission of sin? And almost all things are by the law purged with blood and without shedding of blood is no remission. (Hebrews 9:22). The bad news Bible also omits the following verses: Mark 9:44, 46; Mark 11:26; Matthew 18:11; Mark 7:16; Mark 15:28; Mark 16:9-20; John 7:538:11; Acts 8:37. There are many other omissions of Gods Words and additions of error throughout this so-called Bible.

45

WHAT ABOUT SCHOLARSHIP AND BIBLE TRANSLATION? Is there a place for believing scholarship and reverent translation of the Bible into languages? We believe there is. We believe in the verbal-plenary inspiration and preservation of the Scriptures. The King James Bible is Gods Word for the English-speaking peoples. We have the responsibility to translate the Bible into all languages. The Scriptures, all 66 books of the Bible, are verbally inspired and preserved. Inspiration and preservation go hand in hand. It is impossible for a Bible to be inspired but not preserved. The King James Bible is an accurate representation in the English language of Gods inspired and preserved word. BIBLICAL CRITICISM In the original languages (notice the term languages) of the Old Testament text, the Massoretic text is the preserved word of God. In the New Testament text, the Received or Majority text, is Gods preserved word. We do not accept the higher criticism theories of better manuscripts being discovered during the 1800s. Therefore, we do not believe translations that base their text on anything other than the Massoretic and Received text are reliable. Modern versions do contain much of the word of God but have certain text errors and attack the Deity of Christ and the blood atonement. The majority of modern Biblical criticism has produced nothing but confusion among churches and believers. Those who translate from the Hebrew and Greek texts should do so with utmost reverence and caution. There is a great need for the word of God to be translated into languages where it does not exist but that translation work should be done by those who not only have expertise in the source and target languages, but who also know manuscript evidence and Church history. BALANCE and COMMON SENSE While taking a strong stand on the Bible issue, we realize there are those who differ. We attempt to avoid needless arguments or bring reproach upon the Name of Christ by getting sidetracked or unbalanced as to the real world in which we live. For example: What does the Bible issue matter to the man who lives next door to a King James Bible church if no one tells him about the Lord and he dies and goes to hell? What does it matter if we take a strong stand on the Bible, and argue with the brethren over the issue, but make no effort to get that Bible translated into the 3,000 tongues without one verse in their language? How will it go at the Judgment Seat of Christ for that NIV missionary who dedicated his life to carry the word of God to a tribe without a Bible verse? How will it go for the KJB only pastor who threw scraps to world missions while he spent thousands writing books to attack the NIV? If you had to choose a pair of shoes, which one would you pick? All of the Bible-believing brethren should be weeping over the lack of the word of God in 3,000 languages rather than majoring on fighting others who differ with them. All the modern translators should be on their knees, begging God to forgive them for the millions of dollars spent on repetitious and superfluous scholarship while over 300 million souls have not heard the Name of Jesus one time in their life. In light of the great worldwide need for the word of God in every language, there is absolutely no justification in the attempts to replace the King James Bible among English speaking peoples.

46

TRANSLATION It is our duty to translate the word of God into languages that do not have a reliable translation. Translation work should be a team effort by those who are thoroughly versed in the history and content of English Bible translation, the Received text, textual criticism (including the critical apparatus of Nestles Greek text) and manuscript history. Only those who are doctrinally sound should do translation work. Further qualifications require ability to fluently speak and write in the target language. There is no such thing as a word for word translation from one language to another, so it is evident a variety of sources would be necessary to accurately transmit the word of God. For example: In a language where there is no concept of believe how would one translate Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ? Other terms such as justification, regeneration, etc., carry a great load of responsibility when we think about accurately conveying what those terms mean in a Bible context and how the locals will understand our effort. A translation should also be tested by various practical means to investigate its spiritual fruitfulness and how it speaks to the local in his heart language. Where an accepted translation already exists on the foreign field or at home, and is trusted by believers, all diligence should be given to not cast doubt on the integrity of the translation. Many novices, eager to translate, solve one problem but introduce ten new ones. It is far better to work out perceived translation errors using the accepted text rather than throwing it out altogether. In this area, modern English translations failed. Careless scholarship, fueled by the fire of publishing houses making money, has made Bible translation a business rather than a ministry. The end result has been to make many question the word of God rather than induce careful and reverent study of it.

KJB STUDIES PMB 232 2123 OLD SPARTANBURG RD GREER SC 29650 Email: drgo5849@aol.com Other books by the author: Reese Chart Bible Study on CD. (500 page interactive CD) Commentary on First Timothy Commentary on Hebrews Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew Commentary on the Book of Revelation Charismatic Confusion

47